LawsForAttorneys.comhttps://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com
Your source for analyzed legal analysisMon, 19 Mar 2018 14:12:30 +0000enhourly1http://wordpress.com/https://s2.wp.com/i/buttonw-com.pngLawsForAttorneys.comhttps://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com
Exclusive Q&A: Mike Humbro, the “Mistrial Specialist”https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/exclusive-qa-mike-humbro-the-%e2%80%9cmistrial-specialist%e2%80%9d/
https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/exclusive-qa-mike-humbro-the-%e2%80%9cmistrial-specialist%e2%80%9d/#respondWed, 28 Sep 2011 12:01:30 +0000http://lawsforattorneys.com/?p=464Continue reading →]]>This week, LFA sits down with Mike Humbro, a Phoenix-based attorney who’s quickly risen to stardom in the legal world for his remarkable string of high-profile mistrials. All in all, in the past three years, Humbro has conducted 38 trials — and has achieved mistrial in all but one of them. His unparalleled expertise in the area of mistrials has led others to nickname him the “Mistrial Specialist.” Humbro took time out of his busy schedule to discuss the details of his most successful mistrial strategies.

LFA: Mike, thanks for taking the time to meet with me.

Mike: Hey, no problem.

LFA: My first question is how you first got into the mistrial specialty.

Mike: Good question. I guess the whole thing started about four years ago, in the middle of a normal trial — it was a bad check case. I was still a pretty young lawyer. I was working on my own, and had only had one case before. I had sued Home Depot because the toaster I got there didn’t work as fast as I wanted.

LFA: So you mostly tried civil cases?

Recent Mistrial

Mike: Actually, in the toaster case, I only raised constitutional issues. Anyway, I needed some more business, so I had the court add me to the court-appointed list for criminal defense. Which sucks, because, you know, because everyone who is charged with a crime is guilty.

LFA: Well, not everyone –

Mike: It’s everyone. So there I was, in my first criminal case, sitting in court with the proceeding about to start, and my client is this lady trying to tell me her side of the story or something. I was like, I only met you three minutes ago, so stop trying to talk to me, all right? You don’t know me. I may be your lawyer, but that doesn’t mean you can just talk to me whenever you want. Leave me alone, okay? She didn’t seem to like that, but then thankfully the trial started.

LFA: What defense had you prepared?

Mike: Well, I thought I might argue that my client wasn’t actually forging checks, but was planning on changing her name and was doing test-runs on signing and cashing checks with different names just to try them out. I mean, everyone’s done that before, right?

LFA: I haven’t.

Mike: You must be one of the lucky few people in the world who like their name, then.

LFA: I guess so.

Mike: Suddenly, it’s my turn for an opening statement, and I hadn’t had time to write one because I had been very stumped that day on the morning Sudoku. So I get up there, and I take a look at my client, and I think, this lady probably abuses her kids. It was one of those things you could tell just by looking at her. Now, I didn’t even know if she had kids or not — like I said, I hadn’t even talked to her yet — but I was pretty sure that she was a child abuser. I can be very perceptive like that.

LFA: That sounds like quite a talent.

Mike: It can also be a curse, but that’s a story for another day. So I walk up to the jury, and my brain is firing on all cylinders, like, ping ping ping! And I say, “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my client clearly abuses her children, but she might not write bad checks.” And, boom, just like that, I won a mistrial.

LFA: Just like that?

Mike: Just like that. I had no idea it could be so easy.

LFA: I see.

Mike: I mean, I didn’t even know what a mistrial was. This is funny — I turned to the prosecutor, and I was like, “Did I just lose?” And he was like, “No, you idiot, it’s a mistrial.” And I was like, “I’ve never not lost before! This is so cool!”

LFA: So at what point did you feel like you really perfected the mistrial?

Mike: It didn’t take long. My next trial… oh yeah, I was defending someone accused of killing a puppy. One of the jurors was being a huge wussy about it during cross-examination. So I did my baby voice and was like, “Awww? What’s the matter? Are you going to cry? Is Juror No. 3 going to cry about the little dead puppy? Waaaahhh! Waaah!” You guessed – another mistrial, and another checkmark not in the loss column. I was on a roll.

LFA: What have been some of your favorite mistrials?

Mike: Gosh, I’ve had so many. There was that time I had the local high school band sit in the visitors section and play “1812 Overture” during my closing argument. There was that time I called a mental patient to the stand, and he took off his coat and had dynamite strapped to himself, and he demanded my client be found not guilty or he would blow up the whole courtroom. My client wasn’t found not guilty, of course, but there was a mistrial, so it was close enough. I could go on and on.

LFA: Incredible.

Mike: Thanks. Mistrials… that’s just what I do.

LFA: So, what’s next for you, Mike?

Mike: Well, this year I’ll be teaching the nation’s first Mistrial Clinic at Phoenix Law School. I’ll also be working on a full caseload — including my own, which is exciting.

LFA: Your own?

Mike: That’s right! I’ve got an upcoming trial in front of the State Bar to determine my fitness for continued practice. You can bet I’m cooking up something pretty special for that one.

LFA: Thanks for your time, Mike.

Mike: Anytime.

]]>https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/exclusive-qa-mike-humbro-the-%e2%80%9cmistrial-specialist%e2%80%9d/feed/0lawsforattorneysRecent MistrialWoman with Dissociative Identity Disorder Involved in Complex Federal Diversity Actionhttps://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/woman-with-dissociative-identity-disorder-involved-in-complex-federal-diversity-action/
https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/woman-with-dissociative-identity-disorder-involved-in-complex-federal-diversity-action/#respondThu, 15 Sep 2011 12:28:16 +0000http://lawsforattorneys.com/?p=450Continue reading →]]> YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO (LFA) – When Judge Oscar Ruport of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio received his first filing in Yarp v. Whetner, it seemed like any other routine negligence case. Mabel Yarp, of Andover, Ohio, had sued Kimberly Whetner, of Espyville, Pa., over an alleged boating accident on Pymatuning Reservoir. Early filings into the diversity action, however, developed a rich set of facts and some novel legal questions. For one, both parties argued for competing contributory negligence standards based on the boat’s journey back and forth between the two states. Further, both parties were actually just different personalities of Lorraine Eydars, 46, who suffers from dissociative identity disorder (DID).

Actual Boat

“This is the first case of its kind,” said Thomas Wenlock, a professor of civil procedure at Duke Law. “A lot of things have to get hammered out. Where was the boat at the time of the incident? Which law controls? And which personality was Lorraine Eydars when she was driving the boat and wrecked it?”

Ruport, acting with caution, initially directed the parties to file briefs establishing that they are actually diverse. Both Yarp and Whetner submitted affidavits from Eydars stating that she is only Yarp when in Andover and only Whetner when she crosses over into Espyville — so, in effect, each personality has residence in different states. Simple enough, but things got even more complicated when Whetner filed a cross-claim against William Feck as a third-party defendant. Feck is another of Eydars’ personalities residing in Ripley, N.Y.

“Although Feck was not in the boat at the time of the accident,” said Whetner’s brief, “he was the individual who purchased and registered the boat. His negligent failure to maintain the boat in satisfactory condition was a large factor in the incident.” Feck has yet to respond, as his personality has not surfaced within Eydars for months.

All three personalities have retained separate lawyers in the litigation. The attorneys report that extra precautions must be taken to ensure lawyer-client privilege at all times.

“You have to be careful,” said Lucas Thompsen, attorney for Yarp. “You want to make sure you’re talking to your client, and not another personality pretending to be your client.”

Ruport appears to be satisfied with the diversity requirements, having already set a discovery schedule. The current list of expected witnesses has soared to 39, every single one of which is a different personality within Ms. Eydars.

“I saw the whole thing, and Ms. Yarp is clearly at fault,” said eyewitness Ralph Henneson.

“That’s a load of horse-paw! I saw it all, and that Whetner lady done wrecked the whole darn ship!” said Ike “Rat Hat” Barnaby, moments later.

Ruport is expected to rule this week on a motion for interpleader by Wendy Roppel, an Eydars personality who says she was an innocent bystander injured in the wreck.

]]>https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/woman-with-dissociative-identity-disorder-involved-in-complex-federal-diversity-action/feed/0lawsforattorneysActual BoatJournal Editors Chosen Through Cite-Check Battleshttps://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/journal-editors-chosen-through-cite-check-battles/
https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/journal-editors-chosen-through-cite-check-battles/#respondFri, 01 Oct 2010 13:08:55 +0000http://lawsforattorneys.com/?p=432Continue reading →]]>The University of Houston Law Center made it a priority to address the legal concerns of America’s inner-city communities. Along with introducing new clinics, student groups, and classes focused on the issues facing metropolitan citizens, the school introduced four years ago the Houston Urban Law Journal, dedicated to the policies and legal matters that most affect that group.

Gavel Bang in action

Initially, the Urban Law Journal functioned like most other law journals, choosing its editors through a rigorous tryout, complete with Bluebook exercises and interviews. With time, however, the character of the journal has taken a more unconventional turn, emphasizing what has been called “street editing” and students’ “underground” cite-checking skills.

This has resulted in the newest innovative practice at the journal: Selection of new editors through what is called “cite-checking battles.” Those vying to join the journal’s editing staff match up one-on-one against one another, taking stage for improvisational cite-checking before an audience and putting their source-verifying abilities to the test through intense, often entertaining, contests. Often held late at night in abandoned buildings in the city’s Fifth Ward, these cite-checking battles earn victors places on the journal’s editing board, but, more importantly, immense respect from their peers.

“No editors out there can cite-check like me,” boasted “J-Scales,” who was recently given an offer to join the journal’s editorial board. “Some editor brings a weak Supreme Court case-cite, I hit back with the text of a municipal ordinance in Toledo, Ohio, in 1926. Some editor steps up with a United Nations resolution, I explode out of nowhere with an unreported decision of an administrative judge for the Mine Safety Commission. My boys are like, ‘Damn, J!’ Where you come up with these cites?'”

On a recent Saturday night, the journal held its fall competition in an empty warehouse in the city’s Beechnut neighborhood. After an hour of an amateur tournament, the final battle was set: “Gavel Bang” versus “Erroneous P.” Gavel Bang began with a string of intimidating cites:

Gavel Bang then slammed down his microphone, poured a bottle of Ye Olde British malt liquor over his head, and raises his hands in triumph. As the crowd exploded in cheers and riotous whooping, Erroneous P launched into a cite-check of his own:

Erroneous P then tore his shirt off and leaped into the audience, which, boisterously clamoring in approval, hoisted him up while he displayed various footnoted tattoos on his back. Gavel Bang attempted to keep his assault going, citing single editions with publisher and date, but that proved too simplistic for the mobs of journal editors in attendance, who quickly shouted him down with a chorus of jeers, sending him running from the stage in a barrage of empty Red Bull cans.

“Gavel Bang, he got things going. Ripped it for a while,” said “Mandamus Maximus,” an articles editor at the journal who judged the competition. “But trying to come back with a single edition? That sh*t is whack. Totally amateur.” With minimal deliberation, the board voted to offer Erroneous P an editorial position.

“I know my federal jurisdiction, no doubt,” said Erroneous P after the match. “No one can match me when it comes to constitutional courts or criminal matters. I’ll spit appeals without even thinking about it.”

While the technique has yet to spread outside of the Houston Urban Law Journal, other journal editors at other schools say they are impressed with students who bring street cites to their publications. As more and more people earn cite-checking cred on the underground scene, other law-school groups could embrace such competitions.

“I can put anything in a parenthetical, even substantive information,” said Robert Draysone, editor-in-chief of Memphis Law Review. “But I don’t know how these inner-city cite checkers can tear through judges and officials as fast and effortlessly as they do. I’ve even seen someone cite non-student-written book reviews without even blinking. It’s absolutely amazing.”

]]>https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/journal-editors-chosen-through-cite-check-battles/feed/0lawsforattorneysGavel BangThe Litigation: I Got A Column, Know What I’m Saying?https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2010/09/22/the-litigation-i-got-a-column-know-what-im-saying/
https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2010/09/22/the-litigation-i-got-a-column-know-what-im-saying/#respondWed, 22 Sep 2010 12:05:06 +0000http://lawsforattorneys.com/?p=420Continue reading →]]>Editor’s note: Laws For Attorneys has invited a New Jersey attorney, known as The Litigation, to submit regular columns. These viewpoints are of the author’s and the author’s alone, and Laws For Attorneys does not assume any responsibility for the opinions expressed within.

The Litigation's Bicep

Hey everyone, LFA has asked me, The Litigation, to impart my legal wisdom on the masses. Here’s the lowdown: The Litigation tells judges what the law is. In effect, I am a living legal treatise. The Litigation is a fearsome attorney that juries adore and opposing counsel wish they could be.

My stint in law school was epic. My professors begged me to take a professor position, but I declined. The Litigation isn’t about teaching law; The Litigation is about being the law, son. During the bar exam, the proctor declared it was unnecessary for me to complete the exam after I schooled him on Marbury v. Madison. Separate but equal, baby.

Ever since easily passing that exam on my fourth try, I’ve been dropping knowledge on juries and judges alike, doing appearance for cases where I may not even know who the parties are, but you know what matters? The fact that The Litigation is on a particular side. Especially when I flex a cite or two that opposing counsel didn’t expect; hell, I may just make one up, to get everyone excited. I’ve been accused of using performance enhancers, probably because people can’t believe the crazy-ass points of order that I come up with, but the reality is the strength of my legal arguments is 100-percent natural.

From my experience, the body of the legal memorandum is where you can do the most damage in a brief. As such, and heretofore, I consistently utilize acronyms and abbreviations to maximize on the allotted space allowed. It’s a mechanism that has garnered several victories over bombastic adversaries. As Muhammad Ali said, “It ain’t braggin’ if it’s true.” Well, you know, it’s true, as far as The Litigation is concerned.

So grab a hold of your legal notepads and take some notations: The Litigation is going to set some legal precedents even Justice Marshall would’ve never dreamed possible. I intend to become the most recognized and celebrated judicial body in whatever court I step into. If that means a host of wonderful, beautiful law clerks just begging to score a summer-associate position with my firm, so be it. You have to respect your law, and, if you respect your law, the honeys will share that respect, and that’s when you bang that gavel, son. Motion to adjourn, straight up.

Get ready, because The Litigation is about to bronze up your mind. Props to my mom for making this writing ability possible.

]]>https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2010/09/22/the-litigation-i-got-a-column-know-what-im-saying/feed/0lawsforattorneysBicepsU.S. District Court of Nebraska Signs Justice Ginsburghttps://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2010/09/13/u-s-district-court-of-nebraska-signs-justice-ginsburg/
https://lawsforattorneys.wordpress.com/2010/09/13/u-s-district-court-of-nebraska-signs-justice-ginsburg/#commentsMon, 13 Sep 2010 11:55:27 +0000http://lawsforattorneys.com/?p=400Continue reading →]]>LINCOLN, NEB. (LFA) — Saying that she no longer felt wanted after 17 years with U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg yesterday signed a one-year contract with the struggling U.S. District Court of Nebraska.

“I’ve still got some gas left in the tank,” she said at a press conference announcing the signing. “While I’ll always be indebted to the Supreme Court and its fans for giving me some of the best judicial years of my life, I want to prove I can still perform at a high level. I’m excited to start doing everything I need to do to help bring the next groundbreaking constitutional precedent to Nebraska.”

Supreme Court

That will prove to be quite a challenge to the U.S. District Court of Nebraska, which many feel to be still in a rebuilding phase. Last year, the Court saw a whopping 73 percent of its decisions overturned at the Circuit Court level, leading to the firing of the court’s clerk as the caseload plummeted. Insiders say that Ginsburg signing makes sense for the Court, however, as a high-profile justice on the bench will help fill the docket even if the panel has yet another disappointing cycle.

“We couldn’t be more excited to bring in a judicial legend such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg. This immediately makes us competitive with the other District courts in our circuit,” said newly hired court clerk James Orbellet. “To celebrate, we would like all litigators to know that the first 2,000 plaintiffs to file in our court this week will receive a free Ginsburg bobble-head doll.”

Reaction in Washington was mixed. Although all universally praised the justice for the role she played in crafting some of the most forward-looking constitutional precedent of the past two decades — including, notably, striking down public male-only military academies in United States v. Virginia despite only having served on the Court for three years — other fans said the drop-off in her performance was noticeable. Last cycle, Ginsburg was assigned the least number of opinions than any other time in her career.

“She was one of the very best, without a doubt,” said expert Supreme Court commentator Jacob Wersler. “But these days she’s a shadow of her former self. It’s painful to read, and now we’re all going to witness as her career voting statistics sink. It’s always sad when a great justice doesn’t know when to hang up the robe.”

Ginsburg will take the bench for the U.S. District Court of Nebraska’s first session of the cycle next week. Tickets to oral arguments in a routine labor dispute have already sold out.